User talk:Mechanical Keyboarder

FN FAL
Thanks for your edits. WP:OVERLINK recommends not linking countries. John (talk) 21:35, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

"Supreme Leader"
Please read the discussion at Talk: Kim Jong-un. The title "Supreme Leader" was removed from the DPRK constitution about 7 years ago, and the current leader does not hold that title despite casual use by Western sources. Please self-revert and engage in talk page discussion. Cullen328  Let's discuss it  03:57, 20 May 2018 (UTC)

July 2018
Welcome to Wikipedia. We appreciate your contributions, but in one of your recent edits to George Dewey, it appears that you have added original research, which is against Wikipedia's policies. Original research refers to material—such as facts, allegations, ideas, and personal experiences—for which no reliable, published sources exist; it also encompasses combining published sources in a way to imply something that none of them explicitly say. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. Thank you. - the WOLF  child  09:41, 5 July 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 4
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Korean Empire, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Korean ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Korean_Empire check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Korean_Empire?client=notify fix with Dab solver]). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:28, 4 February 2019 (UTC)

April 2019
Your recent editing history at Marxism shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing&mdash;especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring&mdash;even if you don't violate the three-revert rule&mdash;should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.  Acroterion   (talk)   21:41, 7 April 2019 (UTC)


 * See WP:LEDE for the manual of style concerning lead paragraphs, and stop edit-warring - use the talkpage to discuss why your change is desirable.  Acroterion   (talk)   21:42, 7 April 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 5
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Jeju uprising, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page South Korean ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Jeju_uprising check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Jeju_uprising?client=notify fix with Dab solver]). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:05, 5 May 2019 (UTC)

"Clarification"
Do not add "clarifications" unless supported by WP:Reliable sources. Other than that, also keep WP:Due weight in mind. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 03:35, 7 June 2019 (UTC)

MOS:JOBTITLES
Have you read it? Dicklyon (talk) 03:53, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

You have ignored hidden comments about this in at least two articles, simply because you didn't know the definition of the term "definite article" and therefore didn't understand the MoS guideline. The hidden comments are put there precisely to inform editors unfamiliar with the situation surrounding capitalization of job titles, and they should not be ignored or removed without discussion. I hope you have stopped doing that. ― Mandruss  &#9742;  07:46, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

Please do not make selective changes to articles. Either decapitalize all intros of British monarchs, or none. Same with Russian presidents or other set of bio articles. GoodDay (talk) 20:53, 29 November 2019 (UTC)

Will you PLEASE STOP. Don't make those changes, unless you're going to do so for the entire series. GoodDay (talk) 20:57, 29 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia formatting, I don't make the rules, I just help edit them even if it's only a couple of sentences/articles at a time. Mechanical Keyboarder (talk) 21:01, 29 November 2019 (UTC)
 * My advice, edit a series of articles in chronological order. You may want to be begin with Anne, Queen of Great Britain for British monarchs. Same with English monarchs & Scottish monarchs, Swedish monarchs, French monarchs, etc etc. GoodDay (talk) 21:08, 29 November 2019 (UTC)
 * You're still not following the formatting/guidelines, infact, you're preventing others from as well. Mechanical Keyboarder (talk) 21:09, 29 November 2019 (UTC)
 * I'll be waiting to see if you're going to follow through & begin decapitalizing the intros of the other British monarchs. PS: You'll have a lot of fun, when you start decapitalizing at Boris Johnson & the other British prime ministers bio articles, too. GoodDay (talk) 21:20, 29 November 2019 (UTC)

You're pig-headed. I'll let others deal with it. GoodDay (talk) 21:09, 29 November 2019 (UTC)
 * I am trying too. See below. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 14:55, 22 December 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 4
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited South Korea, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page 38th parallel ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/South_Korea check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/South_Korea?client=notify fix with Dab solver]).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:28, 4 August 2019 (UTC)

Liberty Korea Party
Firstly I want to thank for your input on your recent edit on Liberty Korea Party. However I want you to notice that none of the sources is biased. In South Korea there are two major Medias that are against on Liberty Korea Party. One is The Hankyoreh and the other one is Kyunghyang Shinmun. I excluded sources from those medias to keep objectivity on this article. I want you to read sources more specifically. Majority of sources is just telling the fact, not there own opinion. Lastly If you think I made a mistake or if you have other opinions on this issue please discuss on the talk page. I'm always open to your opinion. Thank you. Jeff6045 00:28, 22 September 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jeff6045 (talk • contribs)

December 2019: edit warring again
Please do not revert article text without discussion on the talk page of that article first, as you've done on Margrethe II of Denmark and on other articles too. It's called edit warring and is of the most serious transgressions in Wikipedia work. We discuss on talk pages, not in edit summaries, and give anyone else a chance to opine who might be interested. Best wishes, --SergeWoodzing (talk) 14:54, 22 December 2019 (UTC)
 * I now see above that you have been warned before about this. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 14:58, 22 December 2019 (UTC)
 * I think WP:ANI, might be the next step. I'll leave that with you. GoodDay (talk) 15:11, 22 December 2019 (UTC)

Be careful editing on the Donald Trump article. Like all post-1932 American politics articles, it's under a 1RR restriction. GoodDay (talk) 17:26, 27 December 2019 (UTC)

Korean conflict
Can you put your Talk page comment in chronological order?--Jack Upland (talk) 22:12, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

May 2020
Hi Mechanical Keyboarder! I noticed that you recently marked an edit as minor that may not have been. "Minor edit" has a very specific definition on Wikipedia — it refers only to superficial edits that could never be the subject of a dispute, such as typo corrections or reverting obvious vandalism. Any edit that changes the meaning of an article is not a minor edit, even if it only concerns a single word. Please see Help:Minor edit for more information. Thank you. Doug Weller talk 11:38, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

Edit warring
Are you going to engage in discussion or are you going to edit-war? -Jason A. Quest (talk) 22:13, 19 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Please read WP:EDITSUMMARY. -Jason A. Quest (talk) 22:20, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

Memorial Day
"Had" implies that they have stopped dying, or that the ones who are currently dying are not honored by the day. E.G. "Those who had died in the war." "They had been there, but they are no longer there." "Have" implies that they continue to die, and continue to be honored. E.G. "Those who have died serving this country." "They have been there many times." "Have" is more open, "had" implies specificity. I'm sure there's a better way of explaining this, but I'm not exactly an expert in the minute details of English grammar. That&#39;snice,Iguess (talk) 07:37, 24 June 2020 (UTC)


 * I've taught college and university writing for nearly 50 years, and there is a definite answer to this. It's a simple matter of the definition of the two tenses in question and the rules for their uses. "Have died" is the present perfect tense ("present" indicating the present form of the auxiliary verb "to have"). This is the single most commonly used tense in spoken and written English because it has multiple functions. The two most common are: 1) to indicate an action that started in the past and continues into the present, as "I have lived here for 20 years." 2) An action that occurred at an unspecified point in the past, as in "I have visited Italy."


 * "Had died" is the past perfect tense (past of auxiliary "to have"). This tense is rarely understood and frequently misused. It is usually called "pluperfect" in other European languages and sometimes in English. It has only one correct use in English. It expresses the older of two actions when the newer one is also expressed. For example, "I had finished my dinner before I went to the movie." The older action "finished" requires the "had" to indicate that it did not happen at the same time as the newer action "went." Truth to tell, most English speakers don't know this anymore and as I'm sure you know, they are likely to use the simple past in both clauses, as "I finished my dinner before I went to the movie." This is incorrect, but it's become so common that it's killing off the dear old past perfect tense - too bad, because as you can see in the correct sentence with the bolding, it can be very useful.


 * So in our article and as you can see in the passage above about present perfect, the correct grammar would be to write "have died" as the article currently does. The grammar that necessitates the use of "have" is rock solid. Regards, Sensei48 (talk) 06:38, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:Korean War § Should the lead mention fighting prior to 25 June 1950?
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Korean War § Should the lead mention fighting prior to 25 June 1950?. Kalidasa 777 (talk) 05:13, 16 August 2020 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Union (United States)
Hello, Mechanical Keyboarder,

Welcome to Wikipedia! I edit here too, under the username CentreLeftRight, and I thank you for your contributions.

I wanted to let you know, however, that I have tagged Union (United States) for deletion, because it doesn't appear to contain any encyclopedic content. You may find our guide for writing quality articles to be extremely informative. Also, you may want to consider working on future articles in draft space first, where they cannot be deleted for lacking content.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=&action=edit&section=new&preload=Template:Hangon_preload&preloadtitle=This+page+should+not+be+speedy+deleted+because...+ contest this deletion] but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top. If the page is already deleted by the time you come across this message and you wish to retrieve the deleted material, please contact the.

For any further query, please leave a comment here and prepend it with. And, don't forget to sign your reply with. Thanks!

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Centre Left Right ✉ 01:00, 21 January 2021 (UTC)

February 2021
Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit you made to Canadians, did not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use your sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. You do not get to arbitrarily change a lone-standing definition, and it certainly is not a minor edit, particularly when you have already been undone. Meters (talk) 03:23, 26 February 2021 (UTC)
 * You might want to read WP:BRD. "D" does not mean "Reinstate your contested edit, and then drop a note on the talk page."  It means discuss the contested edit on the talk page and wait for other editors to comment and reach consensus.Meters (talk) 03:42, 26 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Still misusing the minor edit feature over two years later, very inappropriate when claiming Volvo is "Chinese-controlled". TylerBurden (talk) 06:07, 3 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Please explain how adding information about a company being controlled by a foreign country is inappropriate. Mechanical Keyboarder (talk) 07:20, 3 August 2023 (UTC)
 * You don't seem to understand, read WP:MINOR, and stop misusing the feature that has been pointed out to you now multiple times. Volvo isn't "controlled" by China, Volvo Cars has a parent company that is Chinese. A Swedish company having an American or Chinese parent company doesn't mean that the US or China "controls" the company. This has been discussed on the article talk page, and what you added was WP:OR. I can see below you were edit warring about another China related topic, Zhu Yi (figure skater), so this isn't the first time you make questionable edits about China either.
 * TylerBurden (talk) 07:30, 3 August 2023 (UTC)
 * All enterprise in the People's Republic of China is under the control of Beijing regardless of whether a commercial entity labels itself as private. A company based in the People's Republic of China that has control over one company based in another puts it under effect control of Beijing. Your comment about that article that I had edited is completely irrelevant. Mechanical Keyboarder (talk) 07:35, 3 August 2023 (UTC)
 * And all of that is your WP:OR, removing that someone is American born but adding that foreign companies are Chinese controlled seems pretty relevant to me, kinda like POV pushing. TylerBurden (talk) 07:42, 3 August 2023 (UTC)
 * What "POV pushing" are you inferring? Mechanical Keyboarder (talk) 07:43, 3 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Obviously a pro-China POV, removing that an American born athlete is American born to imply she is only Chinese, claiming a foreign company is actually controlled by "Beijing ". This looks like you are editing with a certain bias. TylerBurden (talk) 07:47, 3 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Incorrect. Also Albert Einstein was a naturalized American but his article's lead sentence of being American was removed. Does that mean the editors of that article have an anti-American sentiment? Get over yourself. Mechanical Keyboarder (talk) 07:50, 3 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Whataboutism about Albert Einstein isn't very convincing when we have these two clear examples of you on one hand downplaying foreign influence on a Chinese person, and on the other overstating Chinese influence on a foreign company. TylerBurden (talk) 07:52, 3 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Your whataboutism about Zhu Yi has no bearing on the issue of Volvo being under Chinese control. Zhu renounced her US citizenship and her history and relations with the US are severed and in the past and have no relevance to her as figure skating performance post-renouncement. Volvo is currently under control of Beijing as of right now whether you believe or like it or not. Just swallow your Swedish pride and accept reality. Mechanical Keyboarder (talk) 07:55, 3 August 2023 (UTC)
 * "Swedish pride" lol it seems a nerve has been struck. You can believe what you want to believe, what you can't do is go around and report your beliefs as facts on a neutral encyclopedia. Either way this interesting connection has been noted and will be taken to the appropriate venues if necessary. TylerBurden (talk) 07:59, 3 August 2023 (UTC)
 * The only nerve here is you assuming the wrong things. lol Mechanical Keyboarder (talk) 08:03, 3 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Well my belief is when the personal attacks based on assumed nationality begin, the point has been made. But I can see why you would not be fond of someone noticing this tendency. Again, there's venues that deals with stuff like this, but I don't think we've reached that point (quite) yet. TylerBurden (talk) 08:05, 3 August 2023 (UTC)
 * "personal attacks"? Seems like a nerve really has been struck. You can continue have the Volvo Cars article mislead readers into thinking it's an independent and solely Swedish entity, I don't care anymore. Mechanical Keyboarder (talk) 08:10, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 12
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Chef, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Silverware.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:02, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

Use of "The" in intros.
Please stop adding the definite article in front of company titles, if they're not referred to that commonly, then it doesn't belong there. You might want to look at the rules surrounding the use of "The" in names. -- Tærkast (Discuss) 19:24, 14 August 2021 (UTC)

Unexplained vandalism and disruption
Hello, I'm GenoV84. I noticed that you recently removed content from Hispanic and Latino Americans without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks.

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit you made to Hispanic and Latino Americans, did not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use your sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. GenoV84 (talk) 12:11, 12 October 2021 (UTC)

Gringo
The topic of your last edit is being discussed at present on the talk page for this article, please refrain from making any edits until consensus has been reached, as that can only be considered non-constructive and vandalism. It is also an opportunity to familiarise yourself with the issues, which I think will help a lot. Additionally, your edit note referred to the use of the term in foreign languages, but this is after all English wikipedia, so no. Regards, Hesperian Nguyen (talk) 23:31, 22 December 2021 (UTC)


 * I think you forgot that that term isn't from English nor is English, and that article is about its usage in other languages. Mechanical Keyboarder (talk) 08:48, 23 December 2021 (UTC)


 * The article is about its use in English, because yes, its derivation is from Spanish, but now it also exists in English and this is English Wikipedia. Again, refrain from editing the lead until the Rfc is satisfied. Hesperian Nguyen (talk) 13:57, 23 December 2021 (UTC)

Lead sentences
Hi there Mechanical Keyboarder! I don't believe we had ever interacted prior to our coinciding edits on. I'm KyleJoan. Nice to meet you! I'm writing because I see you've been editing lead sentences in various biographies of living persons, especially those with British ties. Please observe Nationality of people from the United Kingdom before you do this because there could be reasons as to why the existing descriptions of certain figures say British or English or Welsh. MOS:ROLEBIO is also relevant because there are many situations where the description in reliable sources differs from one's citizenship (e.g.,, who holds US and French citizenship, is most often described as an American actor). In Bale's case, there have been multiple consensuses to describe him as English, this being the most recent one. Please also ensure that your edit summaries accurately describe your changes because you did not properly summarize your removal of material about Bale's notable traits as an actor from the first paragraph. Hope this helps! KyleJoan talk 03:43, 30 December 2021 (UTC)

December 2021
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war&#32; according to the reverts you have made on Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Biography. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note: If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. —Bagumba (talk) 07:14, 30 December 2021 (UTC)
 * 1) Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
 * 2) Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

Please do not use styles that are nonstandard, unusual, inappropriate or difficult to understand in articles, as you did in Joe Biden. There is a Manual of Style, and edits should not deliberately go against it without special reason. ''Specifically, "U.S." does not require expansion per MOS:ABBR, and infoboxes anyways allow more liberal use of abbreviations per WP:INFOBOXSTYLE.'' —Bagumba (talk) 07:36, 30 December 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 18
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Colored, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Slur.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:04, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

February 2022
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war&#32; according to the reverts you have made on Zhu Yi (figure skater). This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note: If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. TylerBurden (talk) 12:08, 10 February 2022 (UTC)
 * 1) Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
 * 2) Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

Motorcycle fairing
You have been adding words such as "fairings to protect the rider from heat produced from the engine" to at least two articles.

Do you have a reliable source for this? Or is it just your own notion? I surmise you know what original research is. Also would be nice if you added edit summaries. Thank you.--Rocknrollmancer (talk) 00:23, 9 April 2022 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 10
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Yamaha MT-10, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Standard.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:06, 10 April 2022 (UTC)

Avoiding cut-and-paste moves
Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you tried to give HK 4.6×30mm a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into 4.6×30mm. This is known as a "cut-and-paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is legally required for attribution. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.

In most cases for registered users, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page (the tab may be hidden in a dropdown menu for you). This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Requests for history merge. Thank you. DanCherek (talk) 04:23, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:33, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Triumph Speed Twin 900 moved to draftspace
An article you recently created, Triumph Speed Twin 900, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of " " before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. FishandChipper 🐟🍟 06:33, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Nepotism baby


The article Nepotism baby has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "Non-notable neologism. Everything here can and should be covered by the nepotism article."

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

''' This bot DID NOT nominate any of your contributions for deletion; please refer to the history of each individual page for details. ''' Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 10:00, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

Avoiding cut-and-paste moves (2nd notice)
Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you tried to give Ducati Motor Holding a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into Ducati. This is known as a "cut-and-paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is legally required for attribution. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.

In most cases for registered users, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page (the tab may be hidden in a dropdown menu for you). This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Requests for history merge. Thank you. DanCherek (talk) 02:38, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Triumph Speed Twin 900
Hello, Mechanical Keyboarder. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Triumph Speed Twin 900, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again&#32;or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 07:03, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Triumph Speed Twin 900


Hello, Mechanical Keyboarder. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Triumph Speed Twin 900".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz Read! Talk! 06:33, 15 June 2023 (UTC)

Nomination of Reolink for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Reolink is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Reolink until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished. Muzilon (talk) 03:08, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:50, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

December 2023
Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit(s) you made to Jessica Jung, did not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use your sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you.  — 🎄☃️ Paper9oll  ☃️🎄 (🔔 • 📝)  07:19, 31 December 2023 (UTC)

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war&#32; according to the reverts you have made on Jessica Jung. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note: If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing.  — 🎄☃️  Paper9oll  ☃️🎄 (🔔 • 📝)  07:19, 31 December 2023 (UTC)
 * 1) Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
 * 2) Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

April 2024
Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, please note that there is a Manual of Style that should be followed to maintain a consistent, encyclopedic appearance. Deviating from this style, as you did in First Republic of Korea, disturbs uniformity among articles and may cause readability or accessibility problems. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. ''The term "First Republic of Korea" may indicate a sequential government, but it is still a historical political entity, and should be capitalized according to the Wikipedia Manual of Style at MOS:INSTITUTIONS. Furthermore, capitalizing "first" and "second" when referring to historical government entities is the current general consensus on Wikipedia, and the article for First Republic of Korea should reflect that consensus. Please refer to articles such as the Second Republic of Venezuela, the Second Republic of Uganda, the Second Polish Republic, and the Second Spanish Republic. If you disagree, I'm open to further discussion on the article talk page, but please do not undo further revisions without discussion.  metro '' (💬&#124;📝) 06:32, 2 April 2024 (UTC)